Final Site Selection Report Kittitas_082118

Home Browse Search

SECTION 4 – SITE SCREENING AND SELECTION PROCESS AX0622181133PDX 4-7 A County/City workshop was held on November 16, 2017, to review project status, layouts, rough-order- of-magnitude cost estimates, and initial site criteria performance scoring of the three potential sites. Results of this workshop confirmed the following three potential sites for final consideration: • Site 1: Cement Plant Site • Site 25: Tjossem Road Site • Site 33: US 97/Old Highway 10 Since Site 33 US 97/Old Highway 10 was added after the September 13, 2017, community meeting, another meeting was added and the site was presented to the community via the County’s online engagement website. Feedback was solicited from January 12 to February 23, 2017, and additional community feedback was collected at the community meeting held on April 9, 2018. 4.4.2 Step 2 – Secondary Site Screening, Scoring, and Ranking The final three potential sites (Cement Plant Site, Tjossem Road Site, and US 97/Old Highway 10 Site) were carried forward to the final site screening stage: Step 2—Secondary Site Screening, Scoring, and Ranking. CH2M conducted Step 2 of the secondary site screening using the complete list of secondary siting criteria that were developed earlier in the project, as follows: • Zoning • Distance from Population Center (ease of access by customers) • Floodplain • Drive Time Access to Interstate and Landfill • Current Land Use • Surface Waters • Depth to Groundwater • Endangered Species • Cultural Resources • Proximity to Existing/Future Residential Neighborhoods • Traffic Impacts • Ownership of Property • Acquisition and Development Cost These final screening criteria reflect the community input that was received on screening criteria during the various phases of community engagement. The three sites were scored against the secondary site screening criteria using the measurement scales shown in Appendix B, Table B-1 and the CH2M multi-objective decision analysis tool to document and summarize results. Scores were summarized and tabulated as shown in Appendix B, Table B-2. In Table B-2, scores are represented with a color scale that ranges from red to green, with red representing the worst scores (i.e., worst feasible outcome) and green representing the best scores (i.e., best feasible outcome). Scores shown in Table B-2 do not reflect any weighting of the screening criteria and are therefore only preliminary results; however, as reflected in Table B-2, the US 97/Old Highway 10 Site has the best unweighted scores. Technical information and rationale used in the scoring of each criteria are documented in Table B-3 and additional background data for select secondary screening criteria are included in Appendix C. Each secondary screening criterion was weighted to show the relative importance of that criterion using City, County, and public feedback. Table B-4 shows the relative percent weights for both City/County and public feedback. The relative weights were applied to the criteria and normalized with the endpoints of the scales set to 0 (low) and 100 (high). The final value scores for each site were calculated using a weighted averaging process in which the normalized scores were multiplied by the weighting factors and summed for each category. These results are shown in Appendix B, Table B-5. Table B-5